fix
Use when you have lint errors, formatting issues, or before committing code to ensure it passes CI.
66
47%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
100%
3.22xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.claude/skills/fix/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
22%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description only addresses when to use the skill but entirely omits what the skill actually does, making it incomplete. It includes some useful trigger terms but lacks specificity about concrete actions or capabilities. The description needs a clear statement of functionality to be effective for skill selection.
Suggestions
Add a clear 'what' clause describing concrete actions, e.g., 'Runs linters and auto-formatters to fix code style issues, check for errors, and ensure code passes CI checks.'
Include specific tool names or file types as trigger terms, e.g., 'eslint', 'prettier', 'pylint', 'black', 'code style', 'auto-format'.
Restructure to lead with capabilities before the 'Use when...' clause, following the pattern: '[What it does]. Use when [trigger conditions].'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description does not list any concrete actions (e.g., 'run linter', 'auto-fix formatting', 'check style rules'). It only references situations ('lint errors', 'formatting issues') without specifying what the skill actually does. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description answers 'when' fairly well with explicit trigger conditions, but completely fails to answer 'what does this do'—there is no explanation of the skill's capabilities or actions. The 'what' is missing entirely. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some natural keywords like 'lint errors', 'formatting issues', 'committing code', and 'CI', which users might naturally mention. However, it misses common variations like 'eslint', 'prettier', 'code style', 'linting', 'format code', or specific tool names. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The mention of 'lint errors', 'formatting issues', and 'CI' provides some specificity, but without naming concrete tools or actions, it could overlap with general code quality, testing, or CI/CD skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A concise, well-structured skill that provides clear commands for a straightforward task. Its main weakness is the lack of a feedback loop (fix → re-validate → confirm) and missing guidance on how to handle specific lint errors that `yarn linc` might surface.
Suggestions
Add a feedback loop: after fixing lint errors from `yarn linc`, re-run `yarn linc` to confirm all issues are resolved before committing.
Include 1-2 examples of common lint errors and their fixes to make the skill more actionable when manual intervention is needed.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Very lean and efficient. No unnecessary explanations—assumes Claude knows what linting, formatting, and CI are. Every line serves a purpose. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides specific commands (`yarn prettier`, `yarn linc`) which is good, but lacks guidance on how to actually fix lint errors when they appear. No examples of common lint errors or how to resolve them. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are clearly sequenced, but there's no explicit validation/feedback loop. Step 3 says 'report remaining manual fixes' but doesn't describe what to do if `yarn linc` finds fixable issues—should Claude attempt auto-fixes, re-run, etc.? | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a simple, single-purpose skill under 50 lines. The content is well-organized with a clear instructions section and a common mistakes section. No need for external references. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- facebook/react
- Commit
705268d
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.